If the Dems are going to offer retroactive immunity to the telecoms, the least we ought to get in exchange would be something BIG. Like net neutrality legislation.

I’m not averse to horse-trading, but ISTM that Steny Hoyer and his clique want to just give away the horse, without getting more than maybe a horseshoe in return.

Sounds great. I also want telcoms to testify to EVERYTHING Bush & Co have been asking them to do, so we’ll have a more full picture of how to go after Bush & Cheney.

Sure, Mr. Preznit here’s all the FISA you want, oh, and by the way we’ve added S-CHIP to the legislation and expanded it to $135 billion, just because it’s the right thing to do.

Thank you for your lovely signature.

Love,
The Democrats of America

Wicked funny and yet somehow enticing. I like it.

In her “candid talk” w/ reporters she defends her fake, defanged “opposition” to Bush and lack of any progress on ending the war, refusal to impeach, and her own unpopularity in her home district. She also attacked 2 NYT reporters for highlighting her complete capitulation on the criminal wiretapping.

Wake up people! The Demo’s are a corporate party as much as the ReThugs, but they don’t spew hate & intolerance in the same way, admittedly. “Fascism w/ a Human Face” is still fascism (corporate rule). The torture, illegal wiretapping, corruption, lies and wholesale destruction of our economy continue because they benefit the political elite that practice them.

We’re headed for 3rd world status. The ReThugs are well on the road to being the next Whig party. The Dinos are not far behind them.

i’m sure c-span will be putting their streaming videos up in their archive soon, but if you’d rather have audio, or can’t wait…

“Help Keep Internet Access Tax-Free. If Congress doesn’t act by November 1, the government can start taxing your internet access. Log on to donttaxourweb.org/actnow/ to learn more, and to help keep the internet tax free.”

For whom does Steny “The Caveman” Hoyer work? Certainly not the American electorate. And certainly not rank-and-file democrats.

I seem to recall that it came down to a choice between Murtha and Hoyer, and Pelosi insisted on Hoyer. I wonder why?

And Rahm Emanuel is another piece of work. Last year as head of DCCC he actively sought out Republicans to run in the Democratic primaries against progressive candidates. He’s certainly not working for the U.S. electorate and/or the rank-and-file democrats either.

It wasn’t Pelosi’s decision – it came down to caucus votes == Hoyer sealed the deal == mostly with the kind of money he had to play with from his Leadership PAC == then you have to ask where did he get the money!

“I’m gonna win. There’s no doubt in my mind. I have the votes of the majority of the existing members and I think I’ll have the majority of the votes of the new members,” Hoyer told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

[snip]

Murtha would also have trouble gathering support in the right-leaning wing of the party, while Hoyer is popular with the conservative Blue Dog Democrats, who see him as their champion in leadership.
http://thehill.com/leading-the…..11-09.html

Noting that Hoyer is also heavily involved in the DLC and A*P*C* — His Friendship/Leadership PAC $$$ handed out during the 2006 election was significant!

http://www.opensecrets.org/pac…..cycle=2006

Why aren’t the Dems showing more spine….

It’s very unlikely that the so-called Protect America Act will be allowed to expire in February without some sort of extension or replacement being passed, and unfortunately, if it becomes a mad dash to pass *something* at that time, it could work out badly for those of us committed to defending liberty. However, that is absolutely no excuse to pass a bad bill.

This fight is just getting started and Repubs in the House will stop at nothing and will use every procedural tool they can to extend the executive authority granted in the PAA and to give telecom companies retroactive immunity (at the top of the White House’s wish list). The fight in the Senate could be even more brutal since it seems Democrats there may be willing to give more away, and if someone like Feinstein (who happens to sit on both the Judiciary and Intel Committees) turns out to be friendly to telecom immunity, we could be sunk.

The most important thing is that any bill that makes it to final consideration not bear any resemblance to the PAA, which was a travesty and needs to be repealed. The question, once again, is will Congress sacrifice our constitutional rights on the altar of ‘compromise.’

People For the American Way has a petition urging Congress to show some spine and not compromise our fundamental rights in this fight. You can sign it at:

http://www.pfaw.org/go/Spine

I realize the constitution is out of fashion these days, but I remember there being a no ex post facto clause in there. Why wouldn’t retroactive immunity violate that?

Because in ex post facto one cannot increase sanctions that were legal at the time of action. But one CAN reduce penalties and that prior convictions on the higher penalties are subsequently reduced.

Thus if one increased penalties for marijuana possession it ONLY applies to convictions after the law is enacted…but if one reduces the penalty, say from a felony to a misdemeanor…all those serving time get out of jail.

If Bush really wants to deal with this loophole of foreign terrorists calling domestic supporters…and the need not to follow FISA Court rules which even allow a post-hoc warrant upon justification….then he can pass the law which is the one backed by the Progressives. But since he really wants to indemnify ILLEGAL ACTS of domestic espionage and large scale collection and manipulation of vast amounts of Domestic electronic communication he wants MORE. And that MORE is also an open door to obtaining PHYSICAL (non electronic) evidence through warrantless searches as well.

Thanks for being a most intrepid attention payer and reporter. Kudos.